My Thoughts on Working with Make.com as an Integration Platform

As a software developer working with small and medium-sized businesses, I often encounter clients looking for ways to automate their work without the cost of custom development. Recently, I completed my second project using Make.com, an integration platform used to automate simple tasks like syncing website contact forms with CRMs, exporting data to Google Sheets, or sending automated emails.

If you're a developer or entrepreneur considering Make.com for a small integration project, here’s my take on the platform — the good, the bad, and how I’d recommend approaching it.

The Good: Why I See Value in Make.com

1. Clear Logging and Debugging Visibility

One of Make.com's strongest features is its execution logs. Unlike traditional custom-coded solutions, Make automatically saves data for every execution cycle and pinpoints the data that caused an error. This makes debugging significantly more transparent and efficient.

2. Built-In Scheduling

Many automation tasks require scheduled execution. For example, my last client needed an OAuth2 access token to be refreshed every hour. Make.com made this easy to implement, ensuring reliability and transparency without needing an external job scheduler.

3. Automated Error Handling and Alerts

Make.com sends email alerts for failed jobs by default, and after three consecutive failures, the scenario is suspended. This built-in error handling means I can offer a level of support for my work without manually setting up alerts or sifting through complex logs.

The Bad: Where Make.com Falls Short

1. Complexity Without Familiar Debugging Tools

Although Make.com is marketed as a no-code/low-code solution, scenarios can quickly become just as complex as code. However, unlike a traditional coding environment, I can't use debugging tools, making troubleshooting more time-consuming.

2. Confusing Data Model

Make.com’s data model is unintuitive, with multiple ways to store and process data: Arrays, Collections, Bundles, and Operation Lists. Each behaves differently, requiring different access methods. Until you deeply understand these structures, working with data can be frustrating and error-prone.

3. Limited and Disconnected Documentation

The built-in documentation within the editor is surface-level and often lacks depth. While the forums are useful, I find it problematic that I need to rely on them so heavily for real-world examples and solutions.

4. Ineffective AI Support

The built-in AI assistance in Make.com was not useful at all. It seemed to be limited to only the one module I had open rather than the whole scenario. That's like having AI that can only help with one line of code at a time. External AI tools were also unhelpful because they lacked an understanding of Make’s data model and could not interact with my specific scenario. This meant that any AI-generated recommendations were often too generic to be actionable.

5. Pricing Model Can Escalate Quickly

Make.com charges based on module execution, meaning that even minor inefficiencies in workflow design can lead to unexpectedly high usage costs. Many users will likely need to upgrade their plan sooner than anticipated.

My Recommendations for Using Make.com Effectively

While I do find value in Make.com’s scheduling, logging, and alerting features, I’ve learned to approach it strategically:

1. Use Make as a Scheduling and Monitoring Tool – Rather than building full logic-heavy integrations within Make, consider using it primarily to trigger external scripts, log execution results, and monitor errors. If possible, keep complex data processing and business logic outside of Make and within your own code. This approach reduces debugging friction and prevents excessive execution charges.

2. Invest Time in Learning the Data Model – If you plan to use Make regularly, spend time understanding its different data structures and flow control modules to avoid frustration down the line.

3. Be Prepared to Supplement Documentation with Community Insights – Given the limitations of the official documentation, expect to rely on the forums and community discussions to solve more advanced challenges.
   

Final Thoughts

Make.com can be a powerful tool for small businesses and developers looking to automate tasks without building everything from scratch. However, its learning curve, pricing structure, and lack of robust debugging tools mean that it's not always the best fit for every project. By using it selectively—leveraging its strengths while avoiding its weaknesses—you can get the most out of the platform without unnecessary overhead.

If you're considering Make.com for an integration project and need guidance, feel free to reach out. I’d be happy to discuss how to optimise your automation workflows while keeping them scalable and cost-effective!